Midfield

[ant555]

There has been a lot of discussion about our best 22 and midfield combinations so i thought i would make a comment on what i think.
It is time to bite the bullet. We simply wont win games if we have Hird,JJ,Pev,Heff ,Bradley and Campo in the midfield. Too slow to carry them all.
I know we will lack experince if we fill the midfield up with kids but at the end of the day if we dont we wont win either.
For mine we can only afford to go with 2 of the above mentioned on the ground and one on the bench at the most. Hird can play forward a lot which helps us get someone else into the middle. A fit JJ still has a lot to offer so that only leaves one spot for one of Campo,Pev and Heff in the middle/midfield rotations. The time has come for us to be using a combination of maybe 3 experienced guys and 5 or 6 younger blokes for the middle rotation. Stants and Watson help us a lot here as they have both stepped up to become consistant performers. Looks like Lovett is going to be able to give us more in the middle and Gus will be able to move in at times as well. Winders,Nash and Dyson need to step up and i hope we will have one or two of Dempsey,Houli,Jetta,Hislop,Lonergan and Davey in the side most weeks.

 

[Audemars Piguet]

There has been a lot of discussion about our best 22 and midfield combinations so i thought i would make a comment on what i think.
It is time to bite the bullet. We simply wont win games if we have Hird,JJ,Pev,Heff ,Bradley and Campo in the midfield. Too slow to carry them all.
I know we will lack experince if we fill the midfield up with kids but at the end of the day if we dont we wont win either.
For mine we can only afford to go with 2 of the above mentioned on the ground and one on the bench at the most. Hird can play forward a lot which helps us get someone else into the middle. A fit JJ still has a lot to offer so that only leaves one spot for one of Campo,Pev and Heff in the middle/midfield rotations. The time has come for us to be using a combination of maybe 3 experienced guys and 5 or 6 younger blokes for the middle rotation. Stants and Watson help us a lot here as they have both stepped up to become consistant performers. Looks like Lovett is going to be able to give us more in the middle and Gus will be able to move in at times as well. Winders,Nash and Dyson need to step up and i hope we will have one or two of Dempsey,Houli,Jetta,Hislop,Lonergan and Davey in the side most weeks.

I agree entirely. Too many of our established senior mids are rather one dimensional, and too defensive in nature.

The acquisition of such versatile and attacking mids/half forwards in lovett, davey, dyson, monfries, demspey, houli, jetta will almost certainly rectify this problem to some degree.

Our midfield has been far to slow and far too defensive for too long. I suspect this is the reason we picked up 4 attacking mids/forwards in the draft just gone. Just a little too late imo.

 

[Darealrath]

Totally agree.

I think i'd go with Heff out of that experienced lot. I was pro keeping Pev late last year but now i'm not so sure - though if he has to earn his spot i guess it's a good thing to still have him. Campo has lost too much pace and really needed a full pre season. He'll be good for depth, but i really want to see our midfield full of genuine runners like Lovett, Dempsey, Winderlich, Dyson and Davey. With Watson and JJ, and Hird pinch hitting in the middle we shouldn't lose anything at clearances and should be a lot better when we have the footy and at putting pressure on when we don't.

 

[Smokin]

I agree to a point, although guys like Heff and Campo seem to need the team to go well for them to go well, a bit front-runnerish, but when supplied the pill with space they can look a million dollars. Campo surely would have to have the best, or one of the best, foot skills on the list.

Hird and JJ are in our best 22. Ive got no problems with them.

However, I was thinking a while back, but I dunno if it would be poplular or not to mention it, but IMO we have to re-sign Sheedy for at least one more year ASAP.

Why? this reason alone. The bunch of kids and future potential at this club is unbelievable, as good as I can remember it for a LONG LONG time, but, the fact that Sheedy's contract expires, MAY see him coach for survival, rather than the best interests of the club.

The kids will take time, maybe too much time for Sheedy to give them the chance, and may play the percentages and go for more experience, in order to save his career.

Eddie McGuire was on SEN on Friday, and made a really interesting point on this in extending MM's contract. He mentioned that hypothetically, if they did opt for a new coach after last season, a new, untried coach will be given a 2 year contract as standard minimum. Why not give the current coach, at a lot less risk, the same? It takes a bit of the pressure off, and aids in the developement of the list, for the exact reason of this thread. There is no coaching for survival, at the expense of the future. Basically, he said a coach should always be signed for at least 2 years.

It makes sense, because if you were to change coach, it is a 100% punt (like it or not), and they would get 2 years as a minimum. If you are happy for this guy to coach today, you must have faith in him for 2 years.

If things really go bad, at worst, anyone can be sacked and paid out. Money isnt the issue for Collingwood, nor should it be us. Football is the #1 priority, not hording millions sitting in accounts doing nothing but earning handy interest.

Yes, Sheedy does generally get seemingly better when his contract comes up, but maybe this time it's something to think about.

 

[hulld]

we don't need to play either of peverill or heffernan. there is also no reason to rush campo in as that is why he broke down last year.

as lovett has indicated he is ready to step into the midfield, it allows us to play another smaller, quickish player in the forward line. this could be one of jetta, dempsey or houli (i know he is mainly a midfielder).

i think hird should predominantly stay inside the forward 50. maybe have 5-10 minutes on the ball every quarter. this way he may be able to put his opponent (he will still get the best defender on him) out of his comfort zone. hirdy could easily kick 30-40 goals this year if he plays in the pocket or on the flank.

in regards to sheeds i say sign him for sure. you can't crucify him for two lean seasons. every team has bottomed out in the last 10 years. his record speaks for itself and he should be given the opportunity to coach the great group of youngsters we have acquired in past few years.

speculation during the season about sheed's contract will only distract the team. i think collingwood have been very smart. they can still sack malthouse anytime they want as they have the money to pay him out. they only extended his contract to shut down any speculation.

 

[Crave]

There has been a lot of discussion about our best 22 and midfield combinations so i thought i would make a comment on what i think.
It is time to bite the bullet. We simply wont win games if we have Hird,JJ,Pev,Heff ,Bradley and Campo in the midfield. Too slow to carry them all.
I know we will lack experince if we fill the midfield up with kids but at the end of the day if we dont we wont win either.
For mine we can only afford to go with 2 of the above mentioned on the ground and one on the bench at the most. Hird can play forward a lot which helps us get someone else into the middle. A fit JJ still has a lot to offer so that only leaves one spot for one of Campo,Pev and Heff in the middle/midfield rotations. The time has come for us to be using a combination of maybe 3 experienced guys and 5 or 6 younger blokes for the middle rotation. Stants and Watson help us a lot here as they have both stepped up to become consistant performers. Looks like Lovett is going to be able to give us more in the middle and Gus will be able to move in at times as well. Winders,Nash and Dyson need to step up and i hope we will have one or two of Dempsey,Houli,Jetta,Hislop,Lonergan and Davey in the side most weeks.

Id have no problem if Hird placed himself in the middle...he can always make something happen. Campo feeding off a pack would suit me fine also.

 

[Merv]

There is no way we should sign Sheedy YET.

He is not going any where else and he will not coach for self preservation at all, but with the best interests of Essendon at heart, like he always has.

For those that say we should sign him, yet sack him if things don't work out, i totally disagree with this.

Sheedy deserves more from us than to be offered something, and then just sacked because things are working out like we want them to.
IF we believe he is the right man for us for the 2008-2009 season, then sign him later in the year, or after the season and stick by that agreement.

I really doubt Essendon would ever treat Sheedy in the manner some have suggested could happen, and i would be disgusted in Essendon if we did.

I'm not sure if we should stick with him in the future or not, so lets just be patient and see how we perform and how some of our future players perform.

Sorry about the topic change, but i had to vent

 

[Smokin]

No, you have missed the point.

It's not treating him badly at all, the reference made by Eddie to sacking was that it was there if the $h.t really hit the fan.

What he was saying was that no coach (and he has got this from the corporate world) or anyone in charge of anything should have such an impeding deadline on their future, unless of course there is no choice. It's not smart for the club, nor the Coach.

If we really respect Sheedy and have faith in his ability, which no doubt we do because he is there now, then he should be given the luxury of an extra season in order to ensure no coaching for survival happens.

now you can say how he would never do it, but I think you'd be hard pressed finding any Essendon fan who wouldn conceed certain aspects of our drafting a few years back was about immediate saving of results, and not really future based thinking. Now that can be due to any number of factors, but that thinking doesnt have to be there.

It is not disrespecting him at all, what Eddie meant by the sacking thing was that the club is not compromising it's position by doing so, rather, significanlty helping it. Only clubs with no money should be thinking the other way. It's not prudent or efficient to think that way. They have that option should it all go totally wrong.

It's why he re-signed MM now. He didnt want MM coaching for survival this year, effecting the club tomorrow. Im sure Eddie knows MM better than you do Sheedy, not being smart. Both clubs have a fair bit of youth coming through.

I think we are in the same boat. Sheedy should be given the green light to explore the younger options on the list, and persist longer, without the thought of his future at the back of his head. I dont care who Sheedy is, you will never convince me that the contract status wouldnt effect him in some sort of way.

it's about respecting the Coach and the club, not the other way round.

 

[Merv]

No, you have missed the point.

It's not treating him badly at all, the reference made by Eddie to sacking was that it was there if the $h.t really hit the fan.

What he was saying was that no coach (and he has got this from the corporate world) or anyone in charge of anything should have such an impeding deadline on their future, unless of course there is no choice. It's not smart for the club, nor the Coach.

If we really respect Sheedy and have faith in his ability, which no doubt we do because he is there now, then he should be given the luxury of an extra season in order to ensure no coaching for survival happens.

now you can say how he would never do it, but I think you'd be hard pressed finding any Essendon fan who wouldn conceed certain aspects of our drafting a few years back was about immediate saving of results, and not really future based thinking. Now that can be due to any number of factors, but that thinking doesnt have to be there.

It is not disrespecting him at all, what Eddie meant by the sacking thing was that the club is not compromising it's position by doing so, rather, significanlty helping it. Only clubs with no money should be thinking the other way. It's not prudent or efficient to think that way. They have that option should it all go totally wrong.

It's why he re-signed MM now. He didnt want MM coaching for survival this year, effecting the club tomorrow. Im sure Eddie knows MM better than you do Sheedy, not being smart. Both clubs have a fair bit of youth coming through.

I think we are in the same boat. Sheedy should be given the green light to explore the younger options on the list, and persist longer, without the thought of his future at the back of his head. I dont care who Sheedy is, you will never convince me that the contract status wouldnt effect him in some sort of way.

it's about respecting the Coach and the club, not the other way round.

I was not only using your post as a reference to sacking Sheeds if things don't work out, as another poster claimed we could do this also.

It's not treating him badly at all, the reference made by Eddie to sacking was that it was there if the $h.t really hit the fan.

It is treating him badly.
If you have heard Mcmahon (who i know is not there now) or Peter Jackson, they say that a contract is a contract and Essendon will abide by it....FULL STOP.It's about conducting yourself in a professional, respectful and honourable manner.
This has many flow on effects.

If we really respect Sheedy and have faith in his ability, which no doubt we do because he is there now, then he should be given the luxury of an extra season in order to ensure no coaching for survival happens.

He is there now, because he is in the last year of his contract.
We probably do have faith in him for the future, but that is yet to be proven.
What is to stop him coaching for himself, as you intimate, next year of he is given a 1 year contract?

now you can say how he would never do it, but I think you'd be hard pressed finding any Essendon fan who wouldn conceed certain aspects of our drafting a few years back was about immediate saving of results, and not really future based thinking. Now that can be due to any number of factors, but that thinking doesnt have to be there.

I could find many, but they would be more of the informed supporters, not the masses.
Sheedy has always said you need a blend of youth and experience.
You could also look at it as rather than drafting for immediate saving of results, as you put it, that we still had a chance of being highly competitive and maybe with luck even a crack at a premiership.

Im sure Eddie knows MM better than you do Sheedy, not being smart

Of course he does, but i don't see why this has any importance as i don't make the decisions at Essendon.
I'm just a guy on an internet forum that gives his views......but i have followed Essendon for a very long time and at various stages been involved closely with the club,and believe i know their values well and agree with them the majority of the time.

it's about respecting the Coach and the club, not the other way round

I don't understand that line

For mine, i don't care how Eddie or Collingwood conduct themselves, but i belive you think long and hard about a contract before you sign it.
Once you do, you stick to it, unless there is some massive untenable situation, not that things aren't working out like you thought they would.

 

[Smokin]

Maybe Im not clear on the context of the 'sacking' line.

What Eddie meant was that adding a year to the contract in no way adversly affected the club in a football sense, only financially, because there was an out. He was responded to the "worst case scenario" notion put to him by the station. In other words, apart from a few dollars, there is no downside by adding one year.

In any case, he did say that knowing MM like he does, if it ever got that bad, he would probably resign first, or the club and him would come to some sort of agreement. But, like any smart businessman, you always have to cover yourself for the worst case scenario.

All that part of the argument was about the downside to the club. Not disrespecting the coach.

Of course contracts are there to be honoured.

In other words, Eddie said that if you believe in your coach today, he should have at least 2 years, because, any new coach would be given that time period anyway. You are not comitting yourself to anything more than you would be anyway, whether it is now or next year. A richer club can have this luxury of being a year in advance of it's contracting, where as a club like North cant be, due to their financial predicament.

It's simply a theory on the coaching contract, which I actually agree with.

And what I (actually Eddie) means by "respecting the coach and club", is that doing this amoungst other things, eridacates sensationalist type journalism, and the individual and club having their name put through the mud for no reason. (like Walls has done to Sheedy today for example).